Language Implementation Body: Budget 2003

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	On what date and in what form the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland was informed of the desire of the Government of the Irish Republic to cut the budget of the Language Implementation Body for 2003; what was his response; to whom and on what date did he respond; and whether they will place in the Library of the House all documentation they have on this topic, including e-mails, letters memoranda and minutes of meetings.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Officials in the Department of Finance and Personnel were informed of the proposed cut to the Southern contribution to the language body's budget on 21 November 2002 at a meeting with officials from the Department of Finance. The Minister responsible for the Department of Finance and Personnel was advised of the proposed reduction on 24 January 2003 and he agreed the budget for the language body on 29 January 2003. The two Governments gave formal approval to the recommendation on the budget on 26 February 2003, under the agreement made by the exchange of notes dated 19 November 2002.
	The papers relating to the decision made on the language body budget under the exchange of notes of 19 November 2002 have been placed in the Library.

Language Implementation Body: Budget 2003

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	On what date and in what form the Northern Ireland Department of Finance and Personnel was informed about the decision of the Government of the Irish Republic to cut the budget of the Language Implementation Body; what was its response; to whom and on what date did it respond; and whether they will place in the Library of the House all documentation they have on this topic, including e-mails, letters, memoranda and minutes of meetings.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Officials in the Department of Finance were informed of the proposed cut to the Southern contribution to the language body's budget on 21 November 2002 at a meeting with officials from the Department of Finance.
	The papers relating to the decision made on the language body budget under the exchange of notes of 19 November 2002 have been placed in the Library.

Northern Ireland Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How the funds for the Northern Ireland Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure for 2003–04 will be allocated; whether provision for Ulster Scots activity, other than through the Ulster Scots Agency, is included in the 2003–04 budget allocation; and, if so, how much.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Funds for the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure (DCAL) for 2003–04 will be allocated in line with the budget document Building on Progress presented by the right honourable Member for Dudley South on 11 December 2002. This is available in the House of Lords Library.
	Provision for Ulster Scots activity is provided for through monies allocated to the North/South Language Body.
	There is also assistance for Ulster Scots activities through DCALs NDPBs, in particular the Arts Council. They currently have committed £83,000 to Ulster Scots activities in 2003–04 to the Development fund for Ulster Scots Language, Arts and Altnaveigh House Cultural Society respectively.
	There are also four lottery applications from Ulster Scots organisations: the Ulster Scots Folk Orchestra, Schomberg Society, Altnaveigh Trust Society and the Ulster Scots Dance Alliance which are currently being considered.
	In addition a number of organisations that have Ulster Scots aspects to their programmes, such as marching or pipe bands, will also receive funding during this period.

North/South Language Body

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 12 May (WA 1), in what form, by whom and on what date the Ulster Scots Agency was informed of the change in the budget of the North/South Language Body.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: I refer the noble Lord to the Answer given on 11 June 2003 (WA 44).

Northern Ireland: Energy Costs

Lord Kilclooney: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they propose to introduce legislation to reduce the cost of borrowing in the Northern Ireland energy market sector; and what proposals there are to ensure that customers benefit from that reduction.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: I refer to the reply I gave to the noble Lord on 10 July (Official Report, WA 48).

Northern Ireland: North West Gas Pipeline Project

Lord Kilclooney: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many firms have tendered for the construction of the natural gas pipeline to the North West of Northern Ireland; how many of these firms are based outside Northern Ireland; and what is the present timetable for the provision of the gas pipeline.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: In 1999, following an invitation from the then Director General of Gas for Northern Ireland seeking applications for licences to take natural gas outside the Greater Belfast area, two consortia submitted expressions of interest to develop a Northern Ireland Gas Pipeline Project including a gas pipeline to the North West, (both these consortia are based outside Northern Ireland). Following explanatory discussions one formal licence application was made and on 12 February 2002 a gas conveyance licence was granted to London-based Bord Gais Eireann (UK).
	The North West Gas Pipeline Project is currently at Planning Permission stage and it is anticipated that construction will commence early in 2004 with completion in October 2004.

Lisburn to Antrim Railway Line

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What procedure is being used to close service traffic on the railway line between Lisburn and Antrim; and what is its legal basis.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The procedure being used to discontinue services on the railway line between Lisburn and Antrim is that set out in Section 60 of the Transport Act (Northern Ireland) 1967.

PEACE I Funding

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which European Union PEACE I funded programmes have been reported to, or investigated by, the Northern Ireland Audit Office; in which cases irregularities were uncovered; and how much money was involved in each case.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Irregularities which involve European Union Special Support Programme for Peace and Reconciliation (PEACE I) funding and in which fraud is proven or suspected are notified to the Comptroller and Auditor General (NI). It is then for the relevant government department to investigate such cases. The table provided below lists cases reported to the NIAO. Actual fraud should not be assumed in all cases and it is for the relevant department to decide whether there is sufficient evidence to refer the matter to the PSNI.
	
		
			 Project Estimated Amount(1) 
			 Oakleaf Community Network £2,210.83 
			 Hospitality Association of Northern Ireland £1,000.00 
			 Dundonald Community Projects £16,350.00 
			 MARI (UK wide investigation) *Not Known(2) 
			 Ballyclo Suckler Calf Initiative £114,139.00 
			 Bryson Community Enterprises Ltd,  Fountain Area Partnership Ltd £114,500.00 
			 Rosslea Community Playgroup £12,500.00 
			 Swags and Tails £25,000.00 
			 Trillick Enterprise Leisure Ltd £12,000.00 
			 Capacity Builder £20,000.00 
			 Petals Daycare Centre £8,405.00 
		
	
	(1) May include funding from sources other than PEACE I.
	(2) Case referred to the Serious Fraud Office at UK level. There was no specific irregularity in Northern Ireland.

PEACE I Funding

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which European Union PEACE I funded programmes have been reported to, or investigated by, the police; in which cases irregularities were uncovered; and how much money was involved in each case.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: A list of irregularities reported to, or investigated by the PSNI is provided below.
	
		
			 Project Amount in £s 
			 Hospitality Association of Northern Ireland 1,000.00 
			 MARI (UK wide investigation) *Not Known(3) 
			 Dundonald Community Projects 16,350.00 
			 Swags and Tails 25,000.00 
			 Petals Daycare 8,405.00 
			 Oakleaf Community Network 2,210.83 
			 Ballyclo Suckler Calf Initiative 114,139.00 
		
	
	(3) Referred to the Serious Fraud Office at UK level. There was no specific irregularity at NI level.

PEACE I Funding

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which European Union PEACE I funded programmes have been reported to, or investigated by, the European Commission; in which cases irregularities were uncovered; and how much money was involved in each case.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Only irregularities over 4,000 euros are reported to the European Commission and are investigated by the European Anti Fraud Office (OLAF). A list of such irregularities funded from the EU PEACE I programme is in the table below.
	
		Irregularities in the PEACE programme reported to/or investigated by the European Commission.
		
			 Project Amount in £s 
			 Bunscoil an Luir 132,724.50 
			 Kircubbin Nursery Provision 10,500.00 
			 Millburn Community Association 4,000.00 
			 Community Foundation for Northern Ireland (formerly Northern Ireland Voluntary Trust) 101,813.50 
			 Rathfriland and District Regeneration Company 3,048.00 
			 Capacity Builder 20,000.00 
			 Trillick Forge 10,875.00 
			 Whitecity Community Development Association 3,066.81 
			 Drumalane/Fathorn Park Residents Association 3,000.00 
			 Northern Ireland African Culture Centre 47,000.00 
			 Disabled in the Community Action 6,600.00 
			 Clifton/Oldparrk Feile 6,000.00 
			 Northern Ireland Association for Mental Health 3,000.00 
			 SPRING 2,900.00 
			 The Blind Centre for Northern Ireland 2,600.00 
			 Family and Community together Group 3,200.00 
			 Fivemiletown Community Development Association 3,297.00 
			 Down Residential Project 3,811.00 
			 Brookborough 22,600.00 
			 NICTU 2,750.00 
			 Carrickfergus 2,575.00 
			 Lisburn YMCA 3,220.00 
			 Border Directions 2,500.00 
			 Erne Catchment Nutrient Scheme 11,277.00 
			 Oakleaf Community Network 2,210.83 
			 Cookstown Partnership project—Little House on the Prairie 8,700.00 
			 Newry & Mourne Partnerships Ballyholland Community Association 22,499.00 
			 Ring of GullionTourism Ltd 31,444.00 
			 MARI (NI) Nil 
			 EPIC 20,000.00 
			 KITE—TWN Project 17,841.00 
			 Springhill Development Assoc 41,500.00 
			 Hospitality Association of Northern Ireland 6,000.00 
			 Moylinn House 4,000.00 
			 Ulster Peoples College 31,000.00 
			 Ulidia Training Services 2,600.00 
			 Walkway Womens Group 4,500.00 
			 Fountain Area Partnership 113,000.00 
			 Personal Economic Development Programme 11,000.00 
			 Sem Bag Manufacturing Project 12,600.00 
			 Dundonald Community Projects 25,600.00 
			 KITE—PlayBoard Project 22,060.00 
			 KITE—PROTEUS Project 16,359.00 
			 Petals Daycare 8,405.00 
			 Roslea Cross Community Playgroup 7,600.00 
			 Grinian Playgroup 3,813.00 
			 Swags and Tails 25,000.00

PEACE I Funding

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which European Union PEACE I funded programmes have been reported to, or investigated by, the European Commission Fraud Office; in which cases irregularities were uncovered; and how much money was involved in each case.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: I refer the noble Lord to the Written Answer I gave today to Written Question (HL3555).

Northern Ireland: Sexual Offences Legislation Review

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether a review of sexual assault legislation in Northern Ireland is currently under way; and, if so, when it will report.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Government aim to publish a consultative document before the end of the year following a review of the law on sexual offences in Northern Ireland.

North/South Implementation Bodies

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether money allocated to a Cross-Border Implementation Body can be transferred from one financial year to the next for the same purposes, after discussion with the Department of Finance.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: North/South Implementation Bodies do not have any automatic right to carry forward unspent resources from one financial year to the next. Where additional resources are required in any financial year as a consequence of slippage in the timing of expenditure in the previous year this would require a specific request to be made by the body during the course of the formal budget process. Any such request would be considered in the context of the body's business plan for the year in question and would be subject to ministerial approval North and South in accordance with the agreement made by the exchange of notes between the two Governments dated 19 November 2002.

Customs and Excise: Review of Current Practices

Lord Barnett: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the findings of the review of current practices and procedures relating to disclosure, associated investigation techniques and case management in HM Customs and Excise's criminal cases will be published and how the Government intends to respond to them.

Lord Goldsmith: Further to my reply to Lord Clarke of Hampstead on 11 July (Official Report, WA 63), I can announce that today the Government are publishing in full the independent report, its summary and recommendations, of the Hon. Mr Justice Butterfield following the completion of his review.
	The Economic Secretary to the Treasury and I asked Mr Justice Butterfield to examine the circumstances that led to the termination of the London City Bond (LCB) prosecutions in Liverpool Crown Court on 25 November 2002, the changes in practice within HM Customs and Excise (HMCE) since the time of the cases to which those prosecutions related, and HMCE's compliance with best practice in the use of investigation techniques. The full terms of reference for this review were given in the reply I gave to Lord Peston on 25 November 2002, (Official Report WA 26). In addition the House will be aware that the Government are looking at the links between law enforcement agencies which investigate serious crime, alongside the review the Chancellor has announced on the future of the tax institutions.
	The Government welcome the report, and is grateful to Mr Justice Butterfield and his team for completing the study so promptly and for the extensive research that underpins his conclusions.
	The review's main findings are:
	that there were major failings in the investigation into and prosecution of the LCB cases, investigated by HMCE from 1995 to 1998;
	but that, since then, there have been significant changes, including:
	far-reaching improvements in management, structure and culture within HMCE;
	changes to the legal framework controlling the regulation of Excise warehouses, which have closed the loopholes used by the criminals in the LCB frauds; and
	following the Gower/Hammond review, the separation of responsibility for the conduct of prosecutions from responsibility for the conduct of investigations, by making the Customs and Excise Prosecutions Office (CEPO) accountable to the Attorney-General, and not to the Commissioners of Customs and Excise, since April 2002; that these changes have gone a long ways towards dealing with the problems within HMCE underlying the LCB cases, and Mr Justice Butterfield makes a number of recommendations designed to reinforce this change process.
	Mr Justice Butterfield also identifies three important areas of concern in criminal law and practice highlighted by the LCB cases, all of which have a wider application than HMCE cases. These are:
	the use of "abuse of process" in trials as a mechanism for attacking investigation processes;
	the challenges investigators and prosecutors face in complex cases in meeting their disclosure obligations under the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996; and
	aspects of informant handling. HMCE investigation and prosecution
	The Government welcome Mr Justice Butterfield's conclusion that significant progress has already been made by HMCE in dealing with the issues underlying the failure of the LCB cases, and the unequivocal finding that there is no evidence in the LCB cases of improper enticement or encouragement to commit crimes or of entrapment.
	Most importantly, the Government welcome Mr Justice Butterfields's conclusion that "HMCE should now put the events of the London City Bond cases behind them and move forward, but not in a spirit of complacency", and the recommendations he makes on how this process, already substantially under way, can be reinforced.
	Mr Justice Butterfield makes a number of important recommendations that encourage HMCE and the CEPO to continue the programme of reform underway in the Department. These recommendations relate to:
	HMCE's role as an independent investigating force—the Government accept Mr Justice Butterfield's finding that, under the current arrangements, HMCE should continue in its present role;
	the handling of human intelligence sources—the Government accept these recommendations, and HMCE will promptly implement the new guidelines and procedures which are outlined in the report;
	training for investigators—the Government accept these recommendations, and HMCE will incorporate them into an improved training programme for specialist investigators;
	external scrutiny of investigations work—the Government accept the principle of external scrutiny of HMCE investigations work, and HMCE has been asked to undertake a study to identify how additional external scrutiny can best be introduced; and
	HMCE's regional structure, and in particular expertise in Scottish Law—the Government agree with the analysis in the review, and has asked HMCE to ensure that proper and informed legal advice is available to Scottish investigators and intelligence officers.
	In addition, the review recognises that CEPO has been revitalised since the Gower/Hammond review and welcomes the changes that have taken place, in particular the increased independence that followed the transfer of accountability for HMCE's prosecution function to the Attorney-General in April 2002. However, Mr Justice Butterfield draws a number of conclusions, which include recommendations:
	that, in order to make its independence from HMCE even more transparent, CEPO should become an entirely separate prosecuting authority accountable to the Attorney-General;
	that there should be an increase in the number of investigation legal advisers employed within Customs, who play no part in the prosecution process but are available to provide advice to investigators; and
	that a more systematic dialogue between HMCE and other government departments responsible for related practical and policy issues would be desirable.
	The Government strongly agree that the ability of prosecutors to exercise their decision-making and other prosecution functions independently should be ensured. The Government will be considering the full practical implications of these recommendations, and in particular how the independence of the prosecutors in CEPO can best be strengthened further. The Government will provide a detailed response to all these recommendations in the autumn. Criminal justice system
	The review concludes that the criminal justice system does not work as effectively as it should, but recognises that some of the problems identified are being addressed in the Criminal Justice Bill currently before Parliament. The review recommends that consideration is given to:
	reforming the operation and rules of the disclosure regime in complex criminal cases;
	the power of judges to control proceedings before them relating to abuse of process; and
	the operation of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.
	These recommendations have potential implications across the criminal justice agencies and departments. While accepting that they highlight important areas of concern, the Government will give them further detailed consideration before deciding whether to accept them.

Uganda

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they and the Commonwealth Secretariat are in touch with the government of Uganda concerning the restoration of order in the northern and north-east regions of that country.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: We are deeply concerned about the deteriorating situation in the north and north-east regions of Uganda, especially following the recent escalation of violence by the Lord's Resistance Army rebel group. We continue to raise this issue with the Government of Uganda at official and ministerial level. Our High Commission in Kampala is in regular dialogue with the Ugandan President, Yoweri Museveni, about the conflict.
	Such contacts as the Commonwealth Secretariat may have had with the Government of Uganda on this issue are a matter for the Secretariat.

UNAMSIL

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will propose that the mandate for the United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL) be expanded to cover Liberia and Guinea; and, if so, whether the force would be reinforced and used wherever the most urgent need might be.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: There are no plans to move UNAMSIL. Its role is to maintain peace and security in Sierra Leone until Sierra Leonean armed forces and police are able to do so. Its mandate is specific to Sierra Leone and its personnel are there because they are needed. Any force for Liberia or any other part of the sub-region would require its own specific mandate.
	An external stabilisation force of some kind may well be necessary in Liberia to ensure a cease fire, and for the political process to move forward. We, and others in the international community, are considering options for such a force.

Indonesia

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are making representations to the Government of Indonesia about the recent use of 36 Scorpion armoured vehicles (supplied by the United Kingdom) for purposes of internal repression in Aceh, Indonesia.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: I refer the noble Lord to the Answer I gave to Lord Avebury on 10 July (Official Report, WA 53).

Iraq: Looting of Archaeological Sites

Lord Renfrew of Kaimsthorn: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	To what extent they are aware of the continuing and systematic looting of archaeological sites in Southern Iraq, such as Umn al Akareb (ancient Umma); and what steps coalition forces are taking to diminish this systematic destruction of Iraq's cultural heritage.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: We are aware that there has been looting at a number of the archaeological sites in Southern Iraq, including Umma, Isin and Umn al-Aqareb. Coalition forces have increased the number of patrols (including aerial patrols) over cultural sites. The Coalition Provisional Authority is working on how best to ensure the protection of these and other sites from looting.

Iraq: Constitution

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they agree with Ayatollah Ali Sistani's proposal that the Iraqi constitutional assembly should be elected, and that its recommendations should be put to the Iraqi people for their approval in a referendum; and, if so, what arrangements they will seek to make for this purpose.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The Coalition Provisional Authority is consulting widely about a process for establishing a new constitution. There is no consensus yet. Ideas include a preparatory constitutional commission and a constituent assembly elected from the governorates. The eventual draft constitution might be put forward for approval through a referendum but this will be for the Iraqi interim authority to decide.

Iraq: Penal and Criminal Procedure Codes

Earl Attlee: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Answer by the Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean on 8 July (HL Deb, col. 134), under what legal code the police and judicial system in Iraq are operating.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The police and justice sector is currently applying the Iraqi Penal Code of 1969 and the Criminal Procedure Code of 1971. The Coalition Provisional Authority Order No 7 amended the Iraqi penal code so as to ensure compatibility with basic international human rights obligations. Further amendments may be required in due course.

Middle East: Gaza Airport

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will use their best endeavours to secure the reopening of Gaza Airport to international flights.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: We shall, and hope that developments in the new peace process, including a restoration of Palestinian Authority control in Gaza, will permit credible discussion of a reopening to begin soon.

Middle East Peace Process

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will ask all members of the Quartet to contribute financially to groups in religious, parliamentary and business life able to support the negotiations required by the road map and the wider Middle East peace process, for example the Permanent Committee for the Implementation of the Alexandria Declaration.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The negotiations required by the road map will be undertaken by the governments concerned and the Palestinian Authority. We recognise the importance to all these parties of support from civil society, and we are confident that all four Quartet members do so too.

Racial Discrimination: UK and EC Legislation

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether there is anything in preparatory work on the Race Directive (Council Directive 2000/43/EC) indicating an intention by the European Commission or Council to exclude discrimination based on a person's colour from the scope of the directive.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Her Majesty's Government is not aware of indications in preparatory work on the Race Directive (Council Directive 2000/43/EC) as to the intentions of the European Commission or Council with regards to including or excluding, colour as a grounds of discrimination under the directive.

Racial Discrimination: UK and EC Legislation

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 24 June (WA 11), what they consider to have been the reasons for the exclusion of discrimination based on colour from the scope of the Race Directive.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Her Majesty's Government are unable to speculate as to what have been the reasons for the exclusion of discrimination based on colour from the scope of the Race Directive.

Racial Discrimination: UK and EC Legislation

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they consider that the exclusion of discrimination based upon a person's colour from the protection of the Race Relations Act 1976 (Amendment) Regulations 2003 is in accordance with the universal right to equality before the law and protection against discrimination for all persons recognised by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, referred to in Recital (3) of the Race Directive (Council Directive 2000/43/EC); and, if so, what are their reasons for this view.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Her Majesty's Government consider that not including discrimination based upon a person's colour from the protection of the Race Relations Act 1976 (Amendment) Regulations 2003 is in accordance with the universal right to equality before the law and protection against discrimination for all persons recognised by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, referred to in Recital (3) of the Race Directive (Council Directive 2000/43/EC) in as much as the directive (which the Government are obliged to implement) is in itself in accordance with that right.
	Most of the requirements of the directive were, of course, already fulfilled by the existing provisions of the Race Relations Act 1976 which, although not necessary for the purpose of implementation, include colour.

Racial Discrimination: UK and EC Legislation

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they consider that it is compatible with the purpose of the Race Directive, as described in Article 1 of the Directive, to exclude discrimination based on colour from "a framework for combating discrimination on the grounds of racial or ethnic origin, with a view to putting into effect in the member states the principal of equal treatment."

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Her Majesty's Government consider that it is compatible with the purpose of the Race Directive, as described in Article 1 of the directive, to exclude discrimination on the grounds of colour, with a view to putting into effect in the member states "the principle of equal treatment" because it does not regard the reference to "a framework" as a sufficient basis for adding the further ground of colour to the grounds of discrimination referred to in that article.

Racial Discrimination: UK and EC Legislation

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 2 July (HL3441), whether they consider that the Race Directive (Council Directive 2000/43/EC) was intended to give effect to the universal right to equality before the law for all persons, including persons discriminated against on the basis of their colour; and if not, why not.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Her Majesty's Government cannot speculate on the extent to which the Race Directive (Council Directive 2000/43/EC) was intended to give effect to the universal right to equality before the law for all persons, including persons discriminated against on the basis of their colour, referred to in recital (3) to the directive (although the directive clearly does not, and could not, deal with all the matters covered by that reference).
	The legal basis for the directive is Article 13 of the EU Treaty, which does not refer to colour.

Racial Discrimination: UK and EC Legislation

Lord Ouseley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the exclusion of protection against discrimination on the grounds of skin colour in the Race Relations Act 1976 (Amendment) Regulations 2003 is in accordance with the non-regression principles as set out in the European Union Race Directive, in so far as existing race relations legislation provides against protection against colour whereas the regulations do not.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: We are not of the view that the non-inclusion of protection from discrimination on the grounds of colour in the Race Relations Act 1976 (Amendment) Regulations 2003 conflicts with the non-regression principles set out in the Race Directive. The existing protection from discrimination on the grounds of colour, as provided for by the Race Relations Act 1976, is not affected by the regulations.

Commission for Racial Equality: Costs of Investigation into Prison Service

Lord Ouseley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the estimated cost of the Commission for Racial Equality's formal investigation into H M Prison Service at £1.5 million represents value for money; and what benefits they expect from such expenditures.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: I am advised by the commission that its total costs of the formal investigation from 2000–01 to date are £666,245 (salaries, main activities and overheads).
	This was a major investigation into the Prison Service, which is a significant area of concern to the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE). It was arguably the most complex and challenging investigation the organisation has ever conducted. Furthermore, the CRE was investigating, in part, the circumstances leading up to a racially motivated murder.
	The CRE's priority was to conduct a full and proper investigation in order to get to the truth of the matter and this has been achieved. The resulting action plan which the CRE will be working with the Prison Service to implement should lead to significant improvements (not least in the minimisation of risk to inmates) which more than justify the expenditure.

Immigration and Nationality Directorate: Complaints Audit CommitteeAnnual Report 2002–03

Lord Peston: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the Immigration and Nationality Directorate's Complaints Audit Committee (CAC) annual report will be published.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: We are pleased to announce the publication of the independent Complaints Audit Committee (CAC) annual report for 2002–03. Copies are available in the Library of the House and on the Immigration and Nationality Directorate's website.
	This is the CAC's ninth annual report. Their role is to monitor the effectiveness of IND's procedures for investigating formal complaints about the conduct and efficiency of staff in IND. Their findings are a very valuable contribution to the process of continuous improvement within IND.
	The annual report highlights a number of areas where IND could improve, together with useful recommendations. IND will use these recommendations to help to inform its wider change and reform strategy, one of the key elements of which is to make it a more customer-focused organisation.

Prison Service: Annual Reportand Accounts 2002–03

Lord Peston: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the Prison Service annual report will be published.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Prison Service's latest annual report and accounts, setting out the service's performance during 2002–03 is published today and copies have been placed in the Library.

Firearms Amnesty

The Earl of Shrewsbury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will provide a detailed breakdown of the numbers and types of illegally held firearms handed in during the recent firearms amnesty.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: We intend to make a written ministerial statement on 15 July announcing the total number of guns and ammunition handed in during the amnesty. As part of this, a detailed breakdown will be placed in the Library.
	I refer the noble Lord to the written ministerial statement made today in another place. A detailed breakdown of the figures is being placed in the Library.

Firearms Amnesty

Lord Peston: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What were the final figures in respect of the final firearms amnesty.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: We have today placed in the Libraries of both Houses details of what was handed in to police forces during the recent firearms amnesty (31 March to 30 April).
	A total of 43,908 guns and 1,039,358 rounds of ammunition were handed in. This compares to 22,939 guns and 695,197 rounds of ammunition during the previous amnesty in June 1996.
	We are particularly pleased to see the high volume of hand-ins of all types of gun and ammunition. The amnesty was a great success and these items are no longer at risk of falling into the hands of criminals.
	The guns figure includes 6,529 prohibited firearms (including 5,734 handguns), 10,513 shot guns, 13,974 air weapons, 9,480 imitations and 3,412 assorted rifles and other guns. In addition, a total of 7,093 other weapons, including knives, swords and crossbows, were handed in.
	
		Firearms and Ammunition handed in during the Firearms Amnesty 2003
		
			Prohibited Firearms 
			 Police Force Total No of Guns Total No of Rounds of Ammunition Fully Automatic Handguns Rifles Section 5 Shotguns Other section 5 firearms Total Rifles 
			 Avon & Somerset 1,309 45,000 2 148 1 1 0 152 80 
			 Bedfordshire 298 5,552 0 48 1 6 0 55 14 
			 Cambridgeshire 579 9,639 0 69 2 0 2 73 45 
			 Cheshire 683 10,627 1 137 0 3 2 143 18 
			 Cleveland 212 3,979 0 23 1 1 3 28 5 
			 Cumbria 572 10,503 0 87 0 2 0 89 46 
			 Derbyshire 732 4,715 1 69 1 7 0 78 27 
			 Devon & Cornwall 2,233 38,110 1 378 20 2 35 436 103 
			 Dorset 698 18,826 0 174 8 28 4 214 28 
			 Durham 367 7,112 0 39 0 0 0 39 16 
			 Essex 1,367 20,973 0 170 0 6 2 178 102 
			 Gloucestershire 272 1,450 0 56 0 0 1 57 10 
			 Greater Manchester 2,662 43,317 3 199 3 2 3 210 81 
			 Hampshire 1,540 42,795 2 183 2 5 3 195 71 
			 Hertfordshire 680 14,504 0 133 18 20 4 175 21 
			 Humberside 622 19,802 3 72 3 5 3 86 38 
			 Kent 1,287 62,142 0 217 3 12 2 234 61 
			 Lancashire 1,038 15,843 0 117 12 6 3 138 85 
			 Leicestershire 792 245 1 66 0 1 0 68 35 
			 Lincolnshire 1,019 14,136 0 62 2 0 0 64 40 
			 London, City of 14 217 0 3 0 1 1 5 0 
			 Merseyside 924 15,869 0 105 0 1 1 107 27 
			 Metropolitan Police 3,189 75,606 9 606 14 39 85 753 206 
			 Norfolk 965 13,301 0 106 0 2 1 109 49 
			 Northampton 523 12,798 0 63 0 4 3 70 17 
			 Northumbria 969 16,775 0 94 2 8 1 105 34 
			 North Yorkshire 617 6,557 0 74 0 2 3 79 30 
			 Nottingham 908 34,712 1 82 1 1 0 85 45 
			 South Yorkshire 407 4,567 1 74 3 1 3 82 18 
			 Staffordshire 823 49,271 2 99 3 7 3 114 32 
			 Suffolk 1,219 23,801 2 141 0 6 4 153 49 
			 Surrey 1,157 31,806 6 174 0 5 15 200 60 
			 Sussex 1,997 32,702 0 273 1 6 6 286 76 
			 Thames Valley 1,189 23,877 1 241 11 38 5 296 62 
			 Warwickshire 453 8,563 1 50 4 0 2 57 23 
			 West Mercia 1,029 28,072 20 101 0 2 9 132 53 
			 West Midlands 1,265 53,190 1 168 6 1 3 179 38 
			 West Yorkshire 635 11,493 1 128 0 5 0 134 32 
			 Wiltshire 574 7,516 1 39 1 0 0 41 44 
			 Total England 37,819 839,963 60 5,068 123 236 212 5,699 1,821 
			 Dyfed-Powys 847 23,526 2 101 9 9 9 130 66 
			 Gwent 332 12,584 1 35 8 46 1 91 13 
			 North Wales 592 5,073 1 69 0 1 0 71 21 
			 South Wales 917 14,128 2 199 12 44 1 258 39 
			 Total Wales 2,688 55,311 6 404 29 100 11 550 139 
			  
			 Total England & Wales 40,507 895,274 66 5,472 152 336 223 6,249 1,960 
			 Central Scotland 175 1,710 0 7 0 0 0 7 9 
			 Dumfries & Galloway 220 71,910 0 14 0 0 0 14 9 
			 Fife 343 6,478 1 28 0 4 0 33 17 
			 Grampian 540 12,529 0 8 0 0 0 8 46 
			 Lothian & Borders 509 11,775 1 54 0 1 0 56 43 
			 Northern 392 13,796 0 42 0 0 1 43 76 
			 Strathclyde 786 19,635 1 87 3 2 2 95 59 
			 Tayside 428 6,083 0 22 0 1 0 23 39 
			 Total Scotland 3,393 143,916 3 262 3 8 3 279 298 
			 British Transport Police 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 MoD Police 6 168 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 
			 Total Other 8 168 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 
			 Total Great Britain 43,908 1,039,358 69 5,734 155 344 227 6,529 2,259 
		
	
	
		
			  Non-Prohibited GunsAmmunition 
			 Police Force Imitations Air Guns Shot Guns Other Total Prohibited Bulleted Shot Gun Other Other Weapons 
			 Avon & Somerset 207 501 363 6 1,157 0 16,000 25,000 4,000 46 
			 Bedfordshire 56 98 63 12 243 44 2,154 1,787 1,567 97 
			 Cambridgeshire 145 134 177 5 506 0 6,119 2,140 1,380 28 
			 Cheshire 118 250 128 26 540 13 7,470 1,085 2,059 30 
			 Cleveland 40 109 30 0 184 413 1,804 297 1,465 18 
			 Cumbria 86 191 154 6 483 6 5,387 1,224 3,886 46 
			 Derbyshire 184 234 189 20 654 0 1,933 2,122 660 0 
			 Devon & Cornwall 526 654 483 31 1,797 2,666 14,473 4,401 16,570 81 
			 Dorset 50 233 125 48 484 1,362 5,027 3,848 8,589 48 
			 Durham 32 193 86 1 328 123 5,427 842 720 187 
			 Essex 264 400 407 16 1,189 7 6,713 3,550 10,703 106 
			 Gloucestershire 34 73 97 1 215 0 500 850 100 3 
			 Greater Manchester 1,503 569 264 35 2,452 402 19,853 6,498 16,564 54 
			 Hampshire 380 471 383 40 1,345 2,200 19,195 7,967 13,433 507 
			 Hertfordshire 113 201 151 19 505 1,705 7,553 1,770 3,476 110 
			 Humberside 115 241 132 10 536 542 9,506 1,848 7,906 121 
			 Kent 250 379 346 17 1,053 249 14,232 4,738 42,923 105 
			 Lancashire 222 316 259 18 900 34 9,786 2,738 3,285 85 
			 Leicestershire 153 277 237 22 724 1 102 67 75 59 
			 Lincolnshire 100 341 340 134 955 18 11,357 1,904 857 1,027 
			 London, City of 3 2 4 0 9 0 20 28 169 0 
			 Merseyside 252 421 100 17 817 4 6,341 1,583 7,941 130 
			 Metropolitan Police 776 962 312 180 2,436 6,571 25,097 10,745 33,193 680 
			 Norfolk 153 221 418 15 856 2 10,713 2,345 241 45 
			 Northampton 128 144 160 4 453 2 7,257 3,987 1,552 279 
			 Northumbria 147 541 118 24 864 4 10,227 2,267 4,277 105 
			 North Yorkshire 119 168 206 15 538 1,209 3,849 1,251 248 18 
			 Nottingham 236 345 190 7 823 1,084 8,861 3,753 21,014 0 
			 South Yorkshire 89 105 92 21 325 0 2,616 929 1,022 56 
			 Staffordshire 221 264 191 1 709 35 17,918 4,956 26,362 50 
			 Suffolk 259 294 454 10 1,066 1,145 10,857 3,122 8,677 101 
			 Surrey 267 365 239 26 957 1 19,173 8,034 4,598 1,560 
			 Sussex 445 675 495 20 1,711 0 22,584 7,172 2,966 33 
			 Thames Valley 165 330 301 35 893 2,041 8,393 3,122 10,321 135 
			 Warwickshire 90 189 83 11 396 609 3,706 862 3,386 22 
			 West Mercia 157 282 370 35 897 300 15,558 4,655 7,559 166 
			 West Midlands 412 475 145 16 1,086 735 40,158 4,452 7,845 50 
			 West Yorkshire 124 211 97 37 501 0 7,532 581 3,380 22 
			 Wiltshire 82 225 166 16 533 62 3,433 1,615 2,406 16 
			 Total England 8,703 12,084 8,555 957 32,120 23,589 388,864 140,135 287,375 6,226 
			 Dyfed-Powys 32 149 450 20 717 1,941 11,103 6,088 4,394 35 
			 Gwent 51 90 68 19 241 9 4,347 5,705 2,523 18 
			 North Wales 121 168 199 12 521 0 3,731 1,018 324 41 
			 South Wales 112 242 253 13 659 280 5,246 4,148 4,454 89 
			 Total Wales 316 649 970 64 2,138 2,230 24,427 16,959 11,695 183 
			 Total England and Wales 9,019 12,733 9,525 1,021 34,258 25,819 413,291 157,094 299,070 6,409 
			 Central Scotland 16 74 40 29 168 79 955 638 38 87 
			 Dumfries & Galloway 19 82 83 13 206 0 2,379 1,017 68,514 114 
			 Fife 53 154 63 23 310 1,004 3,586 1,075 813 94 
			 Grampian 97 158 213 18 532 91 10,267 1,261 910 128 
			 Lothian & Borders 68 204 129 9 453 0 9,238 1,514 1,023 41 
			 Northern 17 95 151 10 349 4,786 5,699 3,197 114 75 
			 Strathclyde 91 343 175 23 691 1,233 8,307 3,200 6,895 29 
			 Tayside 99 129 132 6 405 34 3,150 2,156 743 116 
			 Total Scotland 460 1,239 986 131 3,114 7,227 43,581 14,058 79,050 684 
			 British Transport Police 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 
			 MoD Police 1 0 2 1 5 0 155 0 13 0 
			 Total Other 1 2 2 1 7 0 155 0 13 0 
			 Total Great Britain 9,480 13,974 10,513 1,153 37,379 33,046 457,027 171,152 378,133 7,093

Veterans

Baroness Golding: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any new money has been made available to take forward the Government's Veterans Initiative.

Lord Bach: The Ministry of Defence is announcing today that it has plans to allocate up to £2 million for veterans' projects over the next three years.
	The new Challenge Fund will be used in co-operation with partners in the ex-service organisations, non-governmental organisations and public sector to pump-prime new projects or research or buy into existing activities in order to give them a veterans-related dimension.
	We want this fund to be used to help address the identifiable gaps in existing activity or knowledge that will need to be filled if we are to deliver the agreed Strategy for Veterans. The Strategy for Veterans identifies three key areas for further work: ensuring that as many service personnel as possible make the transition from service to civilian life successfully, that those who do not make a successful transition receive appropriate support, and that the contribution of the services and veterans to national and international security is properly understood in wider society. We would like the fund to be used to support a few projects in each area.
	£500,000 has been made available for the remainder of this financial year and up to £750,000 is planned for each of the next two financial years. Arrangements for the longer term will depend on the success of the fund over this initial three-year period.

Equality Institutions

Lord Ouseley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they expect the proposed Equality Commission to become operational; and whether there will be an accompanying single Equality Bill.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Government will make an announcement in due course in response to the consultation on the future of Great Britain's equality institutions launched last October (Commons Hansard: 22 October 2002; col. 246W), which looked at the possibility of creating a single equality body among other options. As the consultation document made clear, no new body would be established before 2006.
	The Government are taking forward a significant legislative agenda on equality matters. This includes introducing protection against discrimination in employment and vocational training on the grounds of sexual orientation, religion and belief and age to implement the EU Employment and Race Directives. We are also strengthening and widening existing disability legislation, providing rights of recognition for trans-gendered people and looking at how same-sex partnerships might be recognised. These are far-reaching changes which will need time to bed down once they are introduced. We do not believe that a single equality Bill is the most appropriate way forward.

Pensions: Employer Insolvency

Lord Lea of Crondall: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the current obligations in United Kingdom law arising from European Union Directive 80/987 in regard to the rights of employees for occupational pension benefits in bankrupt companies.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: On 20 October 1980 the Council of European Communities adopted Council Directive 80/987/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the member states relating to the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer.
	Each member state was required to set up a "guarantee institution" (the National Insurance Fund in the UK) to meet certain debts—for example, holiday pay and deductions from employees' salaries—owed to former employees of insolvent employers. The provisions in question are now contained in the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the Pension Schemes Act 1993.
	Specifically, the Pension Schemes Act 1993 provides that certain unpaid pension scheme contributions can be claimed from the National Insurance Fund, through the redundancy payments offices, if the employer sponsoring a pension scheme becomes insolvent. If a claim is successful funds are paid to the trustees of the pension scheme being wound up.

Licensing Act: Draft Guidance and Consultation

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What mechanisms are available for Members of both Houses; residents' associations and other interested parties not represented on the Department for Culture, Media and Sport's Advisory Group to make comments on the latest version of the draft guidance on the Licensing Bill.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: A further draft version of the guidance will be placed on the DCMS website (www.culture.gov.uk) in due course. Any individual or organisation will be free to make comments on its contents prior to its presentation to Parliament for approval. The Act requires the draft guidance to be approved by both Houses prior to it being issued. The first draft of the guidance has been available on the website since February and a number of residents associations and other parties have provided the department with comments which are helping to inform the development of the further draft.

Gambling

Baroness Gould of Potternewton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will announce plans to bring forward draft proposals for a modernisation of the law on gambling.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: We have today published for consultation a set of draft clauses that we intend to be part of a wider gambling Bill.
	The Bill will make major changes to the way in which gambling is regulated and controlled in Great Britain. It will build on the work undertaken by Sir Alan Budd and the gambling review body that he led.
	It is based on the three key principles. First, the principle that the system of gambling law and regulation must keep the gambling industry free of crime. Our industry has a high international reputation for integrity, which must not be put at risk. Secondly, the law must ensure that gambling is conducted fairly, so that players know what to expect. Thirdly, there must be effective protection for children and the vulnerable.
	The controls we have on gambling today date from the 1960s and 1970s. They have served us well, but have failed to keep up with society's attitudes to gambling and developments in technology and the leisure industries. They need to be modernised. But modernisation must not be allowed to generate an upsurge in problem gambling. I am determined that we will maintain the highest standards of social responsibility.
	Sir Alan recommended the establishment of a new national regulator for all forms of gambling. It was proposed that this regulator, the gambling commission, should license gambling operators and key individuals involved in the provision of gambling, and that local authorities should license gambling premises.
	In A Safe Bet for Success (published in March 2002, Cm 5397) we accepted the vast majority of the gambling review's recommendations. We have been working closely with the interested industries, representatives of groups encouraging responsible gambling, local authorities, consumer groups, other government departments and the devolved administrations to prepare draft legislation that would give effect to this new system of regulation, which will be centred on the creation of a new national regulator—the gambling commission.
	The proposals published today allow for the establishment of a gambling commission, transforming the Gaming Board for Great Britain into a new body with wider functions, greater flexibility to act and stronger enforcement powers.
	The clauses describe the three purposes of gambling regulation, which will guide the work of the Commission. They outline the ways in which the commission will be able to use codes of practice to ensure best practice across each sector of the gambling industry. Codes of practice issued by the commission will be an important feature of the new legislation, giving the regulator more flexibility to respond to changing circumstances that may raise issues of consumer protection or threats to vulnerable people.
	The draft Bill goes on to describe the principal function of the gambling commission—the licensing of gambling operations and key personnel. The commission will have flexibility to impose licence conditions on categories of licences and, where necessary, on specific operators. It will also have powers to review licences where it believes conditions have been breached or where there is some threat to the three objectives of regulation.
	Local authorities are to be responsible for the licensing of gambling premises. Details of these proposals will be published later this year.
	The Government remain committed also to the sale of the Totalisator Board and the abolition of the Horserace Betting Levy Board. We will bring forward legislation to achieve these objectives as soon as parliamentary time becomes available. Should parliamentary time become available prior to the introduction of a gambling Bill, we will leave open the option of pursuing our horseracing proposals in a smaller, separate measure.
	I understand that a Joint Committee of both Houses is to be convened to examine the Government's draft proposals. The draft gambling Bill is precisely the sort of legislation, cutting across party lines but with some potential for controversy, that will benefit from pre-legislative scrutiny by both Houses. Such scrutiny will improve the legislation and build parliamentary understanding and public confidence, enabling us to strike the right balance between deregulation and the protection of young and vulnerable people.
	We will publish the draft Bill in full later this year.

Post Mortem Removal of Organs: Report into case of Mr Cyril Mark Isaacs

Baroness Nicol: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will publish their response to the Isaacs report.

Lord Warner: The Government are publishing today their response to the Isaacs report, which followed an investigation by Her Majesty's Inspector of Anatomy, Dr Jeremy Metters CB. We advised the House about the publication of the Isaacs report on 12 May.
	The inspector's report addressed the case of the late Mr Cyril Mark Isaacs and the retention of his brain for research purposes following a coroner's post mortem in 1987 without the knowledge or consent of his widow, Mrs Elaine Isaacs. Mr Isaacs's case proved to be part of an arrangement whereby the coroner's office in north Manchester would identify brains suitable for a research programme at Manchester University. The inspector also found evidence that brains were used following post mortems on adults in other locations.
	The report made 34 specific recommendations that bear on the responsibilities of the Department of Health, the Home Office and the Department for Education and Skills. We have considered these carefully and we are today publishing our joint response and copies have been placed in the Library.
	We pay tribute once again to Mrs Elaine Isaacs for bringing her husband's case to public attention and to Dr Metters for his thorough investigation and report.
	We are very grateful to the Retained Organs Commission and to National Health Service trusts for the arrangements they put in place to deal with inquiries from the public arising from the publication of the report. We understand that the commission's helpline has taken over 860 calls and, of these, some 580 were specific enquiries about organ retention from a deceased person which are being passed to the relevant NHS trusts for investigation.
	While there is still work to be done, the programme of action on the removal, retention and use of human organs and tissue that we have put in hand since we accepted recommendations by the Chief Medical Officer in 2001 has already achieved significant improvements. Following extensive consultation, we published on 25 April a comprehensive, interim framework of guidance and other materials to reflect transparent new systems founded on consent. The interim framework comprises: a statement on the use of human tissue and organs under the current law, a code of practice Families and Post Mortems, post-mortem consent forms and leaflets, a code of practice on import/export of human body parts and a summary report on the responses to the consultation document Human Bodies Human Choices. Steps have also been taken to modernise the practice of pathology and to improve the management of joint NHS and academic posts. In addition, the inquiry findings will be taken into account in the development of relevant policy initiatives bearing on death investigation and coronial services which are currently being taken forward by the Home Office.
	We also intend to bring forward legislation establishing a comprehensive new framework for the removal, retention and use of organs and tissues from both adults and children.

Medicines Commission and Medicines Act Advisory Bodies: Annual Report 2002

Baroness Nicol: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will publish the Medicines Commission and Medicines Act Advisory Bodies annual report for 2002.

Lord Warner: We have received the annual report of the Medicines Commission for 2002, which has been laid before Parliament today in accordance with the requirements of Section 5(2) of the Medicines Act 1968.
	Bound volumes have been placed in the Library containing the 2002 reports of the Medicines Commission, the Committee on Safety of Medicines, the Advisory Board on the Registration of Homoeopathic Products, the British Pharmacopoeia Commission, the Independent Review Panel on Advertising, the Independent Panel for Borderline Products and the Veterinary Products Committee.
	We are glad to acknowledge the valuable work done by the distinguished members of the Medicines Act advisory bodies and thank them for the time and effort dedicated in the public interest to this important work.

Medicines Control Agency: Annual Report and Accounts 2002–03

Baroness Nicol: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will publish the Medicines Control Agency annual report and accounts for 2002–03.

Lord Warner: We have received the annual report and accounts of the Medicines Control Agency for 2002–03 which has been laid before Parliament today in accordance with the requirements of Sections 5(2) and 5(3) of the Exchequer and Audit Departments Act 1921. Copies have also been placed in the Library.

Genetically Modified Products

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they have conducted consultation meetings about the future of genetically modified products.

Lord Whitty: The Government is sponsoring the GM public debate ("GM Nation?") so that people can have their say on GM issues. The debate is being managed by an independent steering board at arm's length from government. The public phase of the debate was launched on 3 June and six regional launch events were held between 3 and 13 June. Further meetings have been arranged by organisations and individuals across the country and people can also participate via the debate website (www.gmnation.org.uk). The deadline for people to submit their views is 18 July.
	The Food Standards Agency has also carried out a number of activities as part of its contribution to the GM public debate. Many of these activities were carried out in public and the outcome can be accessed on the agency's website (www.food.gov.uk).
	The Agriculture and Environment Biotechnology Commission (AEBC) was set up in June 2000 with a remit to provide the UK Government and devolved administrations with independent, strategic advice on developments in biotechnology and their implications for agriculture and the environment. As part of this process the AEBC has held a number of consultation meetings with stakeholders and the public.
	Applications for consents to place particular GM crops and foods on the European market are also subject to mandatory public consultation under the relevant EC legislation.

Horticulture Research International

Baroness Gould of Potternewton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will make an announcement on the restructuring of Horticulture Research International.

Lord Whitty: Further to my Answer of 20 January 2003, I wish to report further developments in respect of the restructuring of Horticulture Research International (HRI).
	I am pleased to report that Defra has reached agreement with the University of Warwick about the future of HRI Wellesbourne and Kirton. We believe that the agreement will provide a stable and sustainable future for HRI and meet the core recommendations of the independent quinquennial review team.
	Subject to finalising the details of the agreement and confirmation of the conclusion of a Defra business case that it represents best value, we expect the settlement with the university to contain the following key elements:
	(a) HRI will continue to serve the horticulture industry as part of the university.
	(b) Defra will grant the university a guaranteed research contract for an agreed programme of work. The contract will be for eight years at a total annual value of £5 millon in years 1 to 6, £3.5 million in year 7 and £2 million in year 8;
	(c) Defra will transfer HRI's sites at Wellesbourne, Warwickshire and Kirton, Lincolnshire to the university with effect from 1 April 2004, subject to "clawback" arrangements to protect the public purse;
	(d) The university will make a financial contribution equivalent to the value of the dwellings and agricultural land at Wellesbourne as assessed by the Valuation Office Agency;
	(e) Following a programme of redundancies, the remaining HRI staff at Wellesbourne and Kirton will transfer to the employment of the university on TUPE terms with effect from 1 April 2004;
	(f) The university will inherit ongoing redundancy and pension liabilities of transferring staff; and
	(g) Defra will make a financial contribution to outstanding works required in respect of the Wellesbourne and Kirton estates.
	We plan to exchange letters of intent with the university as soon as practicable followed by a business transfer agreement in the autumn, subject to negotiations and the Defra business case.
	The independent quinquennial review team recommended that HRI Efford should close. The University of Warwick has indicated that it does not wish to acquire the site. Defra and HRI have carefully considered the review team's recommendation alongside other options and, regrettably, concluded that Efford should close in October. Staff at Efford will have access to the same support services as those similarly affected at other HRI sites and will receive redundancy compensation in line with agreed terms and procedures. The land and buildings at Efford are a valuable public asset which will be sold on the open market and the receipts invested in the wider restructuring of HRI. HRI will ensure that existing contracts at Efford are honoured. Defra will facilitate discussions with the horticulture industry and the research community about the need, if any, to make specific alternative provision for the research capability presently offered by Efford.
	Negotiations are continuing between Defra and the East Malling Trust for Horticultural Research about the establishment of East Malling and Wye as an independent research station. The East Malling Trust has made proposals which we plan to discus with it later in July. It is in everyone's interests to ensure that the new research station would be financially viable on the basis of a mixed portfolio of funding as recommended by the quinquennial review team. We aim to decide the future of East Malling and Wye by the end of September at the latest.